“They” has been giving us grammarians a lot of angstg lately. We see “they” everywhere, and “they” makes us cringe. “They” has appeared in newspapers and magazines, on television and in everyday conversation. “They” has corrupted sentences at every turn. I just heard a Channel 5 consulting physician do it during the mid-day weather report: When a person is choosing sunscreen, they should be sure to check the PH factor, he announced. Many of our most respected journalists have even gone over to “their” side too. In the Sunday paper, one of my most revered columnists did it too: In this country, every citizen can rest assured that their right to speak out is being preserved, she stated. Now, just how did “one” of us—even “each and every one” of us--become “many”? I suspect that “their” problem originated in the 1960s.

In the 1960s, both the Women’s Movement and the Civil Rights Movement were in full swing, and we stepped onto the long road to equality on both fronts. In this country, we began to see more females and more members of a wider range of ethnicities playing important roles in government, industry, science, technology, education and virtually all other areas of society. In the academic world, greater efforts were made as well to include figures in textbooks and other educational materials who represented all of these groups.

As we struggled to learn more about dealing effectively with all of our neighbors—and ourselves—we struggled with our language as well. After all, our language reflects who we are and how we view the world. So, when those views change, we must make shifts in our language in order to truly accommodate them. In the 1960s, we leaped right into that task with “quick fix” terminology designed to neutralize the sexism found in our dictionaries, particularly with the words we used for positions in the workplace. After all, a great deal of the impetus for the “women’s lib” and “consciousness raising” efforts of this time had come directly out of the workplace. When Rosie the Riveter and her legions went off to work to support the war effort during WWII, life as we knew it here in America changed--profoundly. The idea of being relegated back to the kitchen in the 1950s did not sit well with a vast number of those women, and they resisted. Many stayed, but they soon saw differences in the ways that they were being treated at work and began calling for change—on all fronts.

Pronoun Confusion in an Age of Gender Correctness

In our language, we started with the words we used for people at work. Mailmen, policemen, stewardesses and waitresses all provided us with challenges, and we started off with an inclusive approach that proved cumbersome at best and absurd at worst. Comedians were quick to pounce when “committee chairmen,” for example, became “chair people,” and it soon became clear that simply shifting from “man” to “person” and “men” to “people” was not really going to do the job. We needed new terms to reflect our new societal norms. Eventually, we began to create titles for positions based on descriptions of the work they entailed rather than the workers who had traditionally been employed to fill them: letter carriers, police officers, flight attendants, and wait staff or servers were born. And, as is so often the case, the changes that we made in language to reflect the way our culture had changed began, in turn, to shape the way we have looked at each other ever since. When we began to look at work in this way, for example, we began to look at the people who do that work differently as well. Somehow, flight attendants just seem to have higher status than stewardesses ever did. The first battle in the war for “equal pay for equal work” was engaged, and we’ve been dealing with various forms of linguistic fallout ever since.

At this point, it is our pronouns that are providing us with challenge. After all, “he” is simply no longer solely in charge. In most arenas in our culture, “she” has been given a place to sit as well. After mucking around with the potentially awkward “he and/or she,” many writers and speakers seem to have simply bailed and grabbed at “they” as their life preservers of choice. And yet, opting to use a gender-neutral plural does not really solve our problem. Despite the invention of the photocopy machine and the successful cloning of Dolly the sheep, we have not yet reached a point at which the average writer and speaker can instantly turn one person into many. The fact remains that, no matter how hard we try, without some Hogwarts’ wizardry at hand, we just don’t have the power to turn “him” into “them” with a keyboard incantation. We are stuck, at this point, with he, she, it and one as our third person singular pronouns; they is still reserved for third person plural subjects. So, how should we handle our third person pronouns when grammar really counts for example in MLA and APA format? Consider Three R’s—Equal Representation, Replacement Therapy, or just plain old Rephrasing.

You can try equal representation. Include both genders. With this approach, our Channel 5 consulting physician would have announced, “When a person is choosing sunscreen, he or she should be sure to check the PH factor.” The columnist in my Sunday paper would have said, “In this country, every citizen can rest assured that he or she has the right to speak out.” If that feels like too many words, or if you are tired of him always coming first, try a little Replacement Therapy. Put “one” in his or her place. “When choosing sunscreen, one should check the PH factor.” A combination of the two can provide variety. “In this country, one can rest assured that his or her right to speak out is being preserved.” And if you feel the need to bail, rather than simply grabbing “them,” a rather flimsy handhold at best, try rephrasing. “In this country, we can rest assured that our right to speak out is being preserved.” They can even be included—correctly. “In this country, all American citizens can rest assured that their right to speak out is being preserved.”

Finally, a word of caution. “Everyone” can give us a hard time. After all, a singular pronoun that refers to a whole lot of people can be confusing. Keep “one” in mind when choosing this particular pronoun and treat “it” accordingly.

So, we need to treat “them” with care. Be sure to think about who “they” really are when you are about to use this particular pronoun. One person? If so, consider the Three R’s (representation, replacement, rephrasing) and use he, she, it or one. More than one? If so, feel free to put them to work.